U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Janak Joshi
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet
(D) Phil Weiser
60%↑
50%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) Jena Griswold
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) David Seligman
50%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) J. Danielson
(R) Sheri Davis
50%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(D) Jeff Bridges
(R) Kevin Grantham
40%
40%
30%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(D) Milat Kiros
90%
10%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(R) H. Scheppelman
(D) Alex Kelloff
70%
30%
10%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Trisha Calvarese
(D) Eileen Laubacher
90%
20%
20%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Jessica Killin
70%
30%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Manny Rutinel
(D) Shannon Bird
45%↓
30%
30%
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
December 09, 2009 09:00 PM UTC
7 Comments
The health care debate, now ongoing, illustrates the extent to which the Congress is demonstrably unable to represent the population in addressing a fundamental social need when the private institutions responsible for doing so have clearly dropped the ball and yet still own the legislature lock, stock, and bandaid.
The banking industry is another example in virtually the style. News stories reporting that the GOP and bankers are colluding to avoid fundamental reforms startle no one, bring forth no denials, spark no clear call to arms by Democrats. Financing economic growth is a fundamental social need, obviously, but once the immediate panic of 2008 was quelled by TARP, poof! The problem was deemed to have been solved (for all but Citibank, thus far) and resistance to fundamental reforms became the marching orders of the day for bankers and their representatives in government, the Republican Party (which is one partial explanation for Palin and the Tea Partiers: they are not, at heart, bankers, but rather co-victims of bankers who prefer simple-minded solutions and downright ignorance since those Monkey & Banking 101 tests were so damned confusing….).
The third daunting national challenge, related to the second, is the continuing relative decline of American industry compared to foreign competitors. How this will be addressed without a viable banking industry focused on the needs of this country has not yet been explained, at least not to me. Is there someone out there who thinks that Colorado’s Democratic Party has put forward a viable Senate candidate who had demonstrated independence of the entrenched interests?
Americans have not yet reached their bottom. We still see resistance to banking regulation and a redistribution of wealth back to the middle class. This will be our downfall as a nation but those Senators and Representatives will keep their word for their biggest contributors, the banks who have ravaged our country even if it means further declination of our country. Where is the rage?
One of the reasons the politics of this economy could prove highly dangerous.
And at a moment like this, to have for a prospective candidate of the “progressive” party an apologist for the financial sector is mysterious indeed.
I wonder if their motivation of self grandiosity is more important to them than the health of our country.
Intelligent people who actually have experience in financial stability, like Paul Volker, don’t matter. Money matters; not upsetting the apple cart matters.
I had to smile at his assertion that the last useful thing to come from the banking industry was the ATM. It’s pretty much true; “innovation” in trade-worthy commodities is pretty much done – anything new is almost certain to cross the line from “innovation” into “creative accounting”.
That’s what all those nifty new innovative mortgage backed instruments were that fueled the bubble, and caused the bust.
is that the Wall Street Wonders are already creating new “risk swaps” with life insurance bundles instead of mortgages, and no one seems to be doing anything about it.
The noted author, Francis Moore Lappe, referred to our government in a recent speech in Grand Junction as being “a privately held government”. She has clearly defined the problem.